It's better to buy models directly from providers that guarantee the quality of their quantization. Otherwise, model quality is a gamble. You can pay the same $10 on Novita or with any other provider.
clangd alone uses 6 GB when working with Chromium’s codebase. Code indexes can be very large, even for a simple application. Out-of-the-box IDEs must index the standard library and keep it in memory.
As a non-native speaker, I really hate how people use this as an excuse. LLMs are good at fixing grammatical errors, so I use them daily as spell checkers. Using LLMs for rewriting is just lazy.
Try:
I'm learning English as a second language. I will provide you with a text, and you have to print the corrected text in a code block so that I can copy it. Under it, there should be two lists: one containing the errors and brief descriptions of them, and another containing tips for improving the text. Do not give your opinion about the text. Focus on grammar.
> This is fine in most cases, but for open-weights models it can be a lot more expensive than what the exact same model can be rented for from third-party API providers.
Filter by quantization, and most providers will have the same price. There is some "base" price even for open-weight models. Anything cheaper means some tricks on the provider's side.
Hopefully, they will do just what Brave did - embed an ad blocker compatible with uBlock lists right into the browser. This way, Manifest V3 might blow up in Google's face if a sufficient number of browsers come with ad blockers out of the box.
That being said, they are not talking about Manifest V3 extensions. It's just that they can't test all the extensions and will have to work out the issues as they implement the extension API for mobile.
> This way, Manifest V3 might blow up in Google's face
I'm sure Google will have a new important security announcement at that point. All of these forked browsers can no longer have the widevine certification unless they conform to certain ad-friendly changes.
Sure, given that they are getting paid for it. How many people will be interested in learning a programming language with insignificant job availability, in addition to contributing for free?
I find that many people contributing to OSS projects tend to be the ones passionate about programming and also pick up new languages "for fun". That could be my bubble though.
It's the beauty of the OSS community. Someone will think Rust is fun, pick it up, and contribute. No one is _demanding_ it per se. If you don't like it, you just don't contribute anymore.
I'm brushing over it lightly, I do understand this will impact people who were passionate about the project and now feel like they can't contribute anymore. Definitely an impact on an individual level. But that is, for better or worse, part of open source.
Aren't some people paid to do contributions? As in, it is their livelihoods? Of Rust developers, like you, there are also some that get paid to contribute to Rust open source projects, for instance regarding the language itself.
That's a great idea, and it's timely too. Right now, cargo ships are being attacked in many parts of the world.
reply